Dear Readers:

As  promised, we want to provide the highlights from our recent reader survey.  Since my partner, Janet Stanton, knows much more about the world o’ research than most folks, I’ll turn it over to her to provide the report.  Suffice to say we are deeply grateful and humbled, not only for the numbers who responded, but much more so for the thought that went into so many of your responses.  You’ll see many of the issues you raised in upcoming articles.

p.s.  Subsequently, we’ll announce the winner of the $200 gift check.  Stay tuned.

Thanks again for providing such rich fodder – and more so for your active participation in the Adam Smith, Esq. readership community.

Take it away, Janet.


Thanks, Bruce.

As Bruce so rightly states, we were astonished by the level of engagement in the site as evinced by the sheer number of thoughtful and carefully considered responses.

Before we get to the juicy stuff, let’s get some Research 101 out of the way.

The purpose of the online survey was to help us better understand you and your interests including what you would like to get out of Adam Smith, Esq. We asked (a) what you view as the most pressing/frustrating strategic, financial, or business issue facing you or your firm; and (b) what you would like us to write more, or less, about.  All of which you did in spades.

A robust 181 readers completed the survey.

Let’s look at what you told us.

Who are you?

According to the results:

  • Over ¼ (28%) of you are partners.  Within that, 8% are Managing Partners/Chairs/Executive Committee members.
  • One-fifth (21%) are Associates.
  • C-Suite (ED, COO, CFO, CMO and other “C”s) represents 9% of readers.
  • 5% come from corporate counsel’s offices.
  • The remainder comprised of others at law firms (I refuse to cede to the insulting phrase “non-lawyer”), law students/professors, consultants and the media.
  • Your average age is 42 and average household income is US$327,400
  • 81% are male and 19% female. Frankly, we’re mystified as to why readership would skew so strongly male.  Any thoughts?

Where do you work?

  • 45% work at AmLaw 200 firms, nearly ½ of these at AmLaw 50 firms
  • 10% work outside the US, mostly in London, but we also heard from New Delhi, Vilnius, Lithuania, and even Kazakhstan.

Some lifestyle indicators

  • 36% of you have traveled internationally for pleasure in the past 12 months.
  • 8% of you collect art, old manuscripts, first editions and the like.
  • 13% of you have a wine collection.

Must say, we were a little disappointed that no one reported having fractional ownership in a private jet.  Maybe next time.

Most pressing issues for you and your firm….

Amazingly, nearly ¾ (72%) of you responded thoughtfully and candidly.  While there was a very wide range of comments, three areas stood out.

Many lamented that their firms were not adequately addressing the new realities of law land:

  • “Aligning our strategy to the realities of the current market and re-engineering our practices to improve quality and efficiency for our clients and our profitability.”
  • “Adjusting our hiring, staffing and promotion and compensation model to reflect the new reality of stagnant rates and decreased demand in our traditional markets.”
  • “Effectively diversifying from historic (now unprofitable practices) to more sophisticated and profitable ones.

The second major theme had to do with pricing:

  • “Client rate pressure.”
  •  “Inability to raise rates.”

In case you missed it – here’s Bruce’s Bloomberg interview on “Suicide Pricing.”

The third concern had to do with firms’ resistance to innovation and technology:

  • “That lawyers stubbornly refuse to use technology and other innovations to improve the legal system.”
  • “Innovation – both doing it and getting clients interested in it.”

Beyond these main themes, several important issues were raised:

  • “Balancing partner income expectations with the reality of a tough economy/legal environment.”
  • “Correctly identifying lateral partner hires.”
  • “Attorneys being hired to do professional staff roles – even with no training – to replace a staff person with years of experience.”
  • “Globalization”
  •  “How best to deal with unproductive partners.”
  • “The glass ceiling.”

From a junior partner:

  • “I also have real concerns about whether the leadership’s incentives are really aligned with my own.”

We heard this concern from a few associates:

  • “Finding a path forward when I’m not sure I want the life-sucking grind of staying on partnership track.”

Editorial comments

Nearly half (46%) of you provided suggestions for new articles or deeper examination of topics.  The only prevailing “negative” is that many readers wanted more posts!

A very few of the very positive comments (think Bruce may be blushing!):

  • “Your columns are brilliant, I pass them along regularly.” [Ed. note – please continue doing so!]
  • “Love all that you do, but particularly your discussion of the legal recruiting process and associate compensation.”
  • “It is intellectually stimulating and provides great food for thought.”

More importantly, you offered some very helpful ideas for future articles—many of which you’ll see going forward.

Some asked to see more articles addressing issues at a wider range of law firms:

  • I would appreciate more emphasis on the middle market law firm.
  • You could use a somewhat less New York-centric attitude to the practice.

Other ideas included:

  • “Suggestion that you provide insight from more of the general counsel/client side decision makers as there appears to be message confusion at times about what the clients want – price, predictability, insight, etc.
  • “Most of your content is geared toward senior management.  Understandably so.  But the young partners and senior associates who are the next generation of leadership are dealing with the new realities as well, and obviously have much longer time horizons.
  • “Could do some analysis on the success (or lack thereof) of firms that have made concerted efforts to expand internationally.
  • “More on blowing up the canard that all AMLAW 100 firms are equal.

Again, thanks for participating in the survey.  You provided valuable insights on how to make the site stronger and more responsive to you, our readers.

Related Articles

Email Delivery

Get Our Latest Articles Delivered to your inbox +
X

Sign-up for email

Be the first to learn of Adam Smith, Esq. invitation-only events, surveys, and reports.





Get Our Latest Articles Delivered to Your Inbox

Like having coffee with Adam Smith, Esq. in the morning (coffee not included).

Oops, we need this information
Oops, we need this information
Oops, we need this information

Thanks and a hearty virtual handshake from the team at Adam Smith, Esq.; we’re glad you opted to hear from us.

What you can expect from us:

  • an email whenever we publish a new article;
  • respect and affection for our loyal readers. This means we’ll exercise the strictest discretion with your contact info; we will never release it outside our firm under any circumstances, not for love and not for money. And we ourselves will email you about a new article and only about a new article.

Welcome onboard! If you like what you read, tell your friends, and if you don’t, tell us.

PS: You know where to find us so we invite you to make this a two-way conversation; if you have an idea or suggestion for something you’d like us to discuss, drop it in our inbox. No promises that we’ll write about it, but we will faithfully promise to read your thoughts carefully.